17 ms·

> GM said in a statement that “... an increasingly competitive robotaxi market” were the reasons for the change. Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, s

> GM said in a statement that “... an increasingly competitive robotaxi market” were the reasons for the change. Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, seemingly much further behind, Tesla Cybertaxi, Amazon/Zoox, and Uber/Yandex? Cruise allegedly has one of the most sophisticated autonomous driving platforms, and GM's Super Cruise (if they share any tech) is comparable to Tesla FSD. Strange that they would bow out. Small anecdote: I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy. Ford just lowered the cost of its BlueCruise subscription by 1/3rd. In an earnings call eight months prior they remarked they made a 70% margin on the service. It seems like drivers did not find the feature compelling and were not renewing. Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board.

ugh123 2y ago
> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board I think you mean interest in level 3 autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board
leesec 2y ago
Yes and Google has spent 20B to get to a small rollout
com2kid 2y ago
> Small anecdote: I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy. Sadly this is believable, I've asked to check out things like remote start and control of heating/cooling, and the sales people cannot show those features off because they require an app + subscription tied to the car.
- mingus88 2y ago
  Based on my anecdotal experience, another issue is that salespeople are not trained on the tech I worked on a feature for new vehicles and the company failed in part because buyers simply didn’t know those features were part of the vehicle. Dealers never set it up for the buyer and it wasn’t something many people would think to do on their own A salesperson isn’t going to jeopardize an easy sale by bungling some fancy new feature they can’t control
  - rgovostes 2y ago
    I don't want to be a jerk but the salesperson couldn't pronounce "autonomous" which tells me they aren't being trained in selling the feature at all. I can't even remember him referring to it by the marketing name.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - ashoeafoot 2y ago
      HN priorities are not real world priorities
      - lukan 2y ago
        People in the real world are not interested in autonomous driving? I doubt that. They just care less for the technical details.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    I’d guess this is at least half the features on my iPhone. I’m sure it can do things that I’m not even thinking a phone can do, but nobody set anything up, and it’s not very obvious or discoverable.
schiffern 2y ago
>Google/Waymo ... Amazon/Zoox ... Uber/Yandex ... GM Super Cruise ... Ford BluesClues Conspicuously absent is The Car+AI Company That Shall Not Be Named. That's the one the press release is referring to, I guarantee it.
- rgovostes 2y ago
  Just edited to add it in. Wikipedia says they're not going into production until 2027 though, and unlike the others I don't think they're operating in any markets.
  - schiffern 2y ago
    GM SuperCruise and Ford BluesClues are comparable products, so I don't know why you'd exclude Tesla's product as not "operating in any markets." Other companies have neat AV demos (some that they even make people pay for), but fundamentally they can't and won't scale.
    - rgovostes 2y ago
      I am not sure I have all the facts straight but: Super Cruise and BlueCruise are features available on GM and Ford passenger cars, respectively. They aren't taxi services. I tried to make the distinction between companies participating in the "increasingly competitive robotaxi market" versus just the ones that have some level of autonomous driving capability; tweaked comment. GM was majority stakeholder in Cruise, which was gearing up to a ride hailing service. Cruise's cars have instruments like LiDAR on the roof, unlike Super Cruise-equipped cars. Ford wrote about an "initial launch of a commercial self-driving service in 2021" but I don't think it materialized. A photo of their robotaxi bears the logo of Argo AI, a startup that shut down in 2022.
      - schiffern 2y ago
        The difference is that GM and Ford have no viable strategy for transitioning these features into taxi services, whereas Tesla does. Not sure how it's suddenly so controversial to realize that Detroit is terrible at software strategy. This has been the conventional wisdom (and with good reason) for quite some time.
xnx 2y ago
> Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, seemingly much further behind Yes. I think GM leadership has finally learned enough to realize how far behind they are.
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  Maybe in some small parts of the country. Tesla is dominating most everywhere else in the US. I definitely have no access to a Waymo but have been driven by FSD in heavy construction. (Do not own a Tesla myself).
  - xnx 2y ago
    It's possible that Tesla will have a massive jump in capability of their system, but currently it doesn't do any self-driving anywhere (e.g. you can't sit in the back seat).
    - red75prime 2y ago
      ASS. Actually Smart Summon. You can sit in the back seat (but there's no point to, as the maximal distance to the destination and speed are appropriate only for parking lots).
  - renewiltord 2y ago
    I’ve fallen asleep alone in a Waymo on the way home. I don’t think you can do that yet in a Tesla.
  - root_axis 2y ago
    Tesla is not "dominating" Waymo, they provide completely different offerings. Waymo provides a taxi service (like Uber) with autonomous vehicles. Tesla sells cars that offer a driving assistant feature, but the system is not able to operate safely without human supervision. I can safely and legally take a Waymo home after getting drunk at the bar, this is not true of a Tesla.
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    get drunk, pass out in a Tesla and have it take you home. come back here when this happens (ballparking 2089…).
chrchr 2y ago
It makes you wonder how much more effective U.S. auto makers might be without the regulation that requires them to sell through dealerships.
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Dealerships have massively consolidated too, they have larger profits than automakers. It's absurd.
- axus 2y ago
  Isn't Tesla service worse than the dealerships? Maybe things have changed, my opinion is completely based on what I've read on the Internet.
  - correlator 2y ago
    I love the tesla service. Bought my car without talking to a single sales person, they come to my home to rotate my tires on my schedule. Only complaint is cosmetic service tends to have a long appointment wait time, but things like a cracked windshield were immediately serviced. I don't know how I will switch to another car brand after this.
  - Rebelgecko 2y ago
    Their buying/test drive experience is top tier IMO but I know multiple people who waited literally 4+ months to get undrivable cars repaired. Those experiences were mostly pre-2023 so maybe it's better now
    - ggreer 2y ago
      It was bad a couple years ago but has gotten a lot better. The reason for this was that Tesla scaled up manufacturing quickly, but took longer to scale up service centers and certify third party shops. For a while there was only one certified Tesla repair shop within 100 miles of me. Now there are at least ten, four of which are Tesla service centers.
  - 2y ago
throwaway48476 2y ago
There is still interest in autonomous driving, just not assisted driving where the marketing did not match the reality.
jerlam 2y ago
I am not sure you want to include international markets (if not the technology) but it seems like Baidu in China is nearly at par with Waymo: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/18/cars/china-baidu-apollo-go-robotaxi-anxiety-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/18/cars/china-baidu-apollo-go-ro...
- crazygringo 2y ago
  > Earlier this month, one robotaxi ran a red light and crashed into a pedestrian, state-run paper People’s Daily reported. That doesn't sound like it's nearly at par. I'd love to see some direct safety comparison stats.
jedberg 2y ago
And when you go to Tesla for a test drive, they first thing they do is shove it into auto-cruise or whatever they call it whether you want to or not! At least that is what happened to me when I test drove one 10 years ago. Maybe they don't do that anymore.
- correlator 2y ago
  Wow that must have been a wild experience 10 years ago! Today, I think they should do this. It is rare I need to touch the wheel or pedal these days and people should experience it.
  - jedberg 2y ago
    Yeah 10 years ago it was a bit much. It was pretty much just lane keeping and distance keeping, but it didn't read signs or lights yet. So if you're coming up on a signal it would just keep going!
    - schiffern 2y ago
      Quick, nobody tell them about cruise control. ;-) > Chrysler was the first manufacturer to implement the device in 1958. They called it “Auto-Pilot” and it appeared in their luxury model as an upgraded option. Soon after, General Motors installed it in their Cadillac vehicles, naming it “Cruise Control” which has stuck to this day. https://www.folsomautomall.com/blog/2022/november/21/the-history-of-cruise-control.htm https://www.folsomautomall.com/blog/2022/november/21/the-his...
      - fastball 2y ago
        Not sure I understand your point.
        schiffern 2y ago
        >>> it didn't read signs or lights yet. So if you're coming up on a signal it would just keep going!
boshalfoshal 2y ago
Supercruise might be comparable to Tesla's "Autosteer" product but its incomparable to Tesla's paid "FSD Supervised" product. The latter is closer to a Waymo or Cruise than it is to a Mercedes or GM driver assist.
- jaimex2 2y ago
  It's not even close between Tesla and Waymo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv9HtWUf27s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv9HtWUf27s Arguably this is Waymo in its "home turf"
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - mbreese 2y ago
    Arguably, it would be a better comparison if the Tesla was restricted from highway driving. I understand the letting the car figure out its own route, but I’m more interested in seeing the Tesla navigate city streets.
  - adrr 2y ago
    Tesla can't self drive in any condition on any street. Hard to compare that to a level 4 company where the car can go hundreds of thousands of miles without disengagement. Being a owner FSD, its no where near being able to drive itself without supervision, it tries to run reds, misses people in cross walks and can't understand signs like "Do Not Enter".
    - minhazm 2y ago
      > Hard to compare that to a level 4 company where the car can go hundreds of thousands of miles without disengagement This is nowhere close to being true. The latest numbers I could find for 2022 are 17,060 miles per disengagement[1] for Waymo. And even then the definition is not quite clear, because these are safety disengagements from what I can tell, and not disengagements for things like getting stuck because the road is closed or something else. [1] https://www.eetimes.com/waymo-cruise-dominate-av-testing/ https://www.eetimes.com/waymo-cruise-dominate-av-testing/
margalabargala 2y ago
> Small anecdote: I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy. That was a your-dealership issue, not a GM issue. GM doesn't run the dealerships (though they sure have plenty of influence). I test drove the Silverado EV a month ago and got to try out super cruise.
- schiffern 2y ago
  That's a "GM's business model" problem, which is again a GM problem. The top-selling EV maker in the US doesn't have any dealerships, so clearly it's not an insurmountable problem. GM just hasn't prioritized surmounting it.
  - dangus 2y ago
    To be fair to GM, Tesla basically had to be a brand new auto company and work through a whole bunch of legal loopholes and battles just to have their direct sales model. GM and the rest of the legacy automakers are essentially bound to the dealership system and the dealerships represent a much larger lobbying base than the automakers themselves. We are seeing this play out with VW’s attempt to direct-sell Scout vehicle's and immediately getting challenged/sued by dealerships over it. [1] https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2024-10-25/auto-dealer-groups-to-challenge-scout-motors-decision-to-sell-directly-to-us-consumers https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2024-10-25/...
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      GM and the other automakers should be lobbying to change the dealership laws then.
      - AlotOfReading 2y ago
        They do.
AlotOfReading 2y ago
Cruise and GM Supercruise/ultracruise share nothing except the names and a VP somewhere inside GM. Entirely separate organizations and tech, at least the last time I had any knowledge of the matter.
- porphyra 2y ago
  Yeah and neither of them is close to FSD in capabilities lol. Super Cruise/Ultra Cruise is a brittle highway-only thing, only available in a handful of $200k+ GM cars, that works by localizing to a detailed lidar map of some interstate routes.
  - mouth 2y ago
    This was also available on the Chevy Bolt EUV as an add-on for $2,200. The Bolt EUV started at $28,795, so with the add-on it could be had for ~$31k before tax, title, etc. Not sure where you got the $200k+ number.
    - AlotOfReading 2y ago
      The parent post is talking about the Cruise vehicles made by the company this article is covering, a completely separate thing from the supercruise feature that consumers could actually buy. At one point many years ago, the Cruise vehicles cost >200k to manufacture.
    - porphyra 2y ago
      Ultra Cruise was only available on the expensive Celestiq before it got cancelled and merged with Super Cruise. Apparently, the Celestiq starts at $340,000, even higher than my original estimate of $200k.
droopyEyelids 2y ago
I’m one of the people that did not renew BlueCruise and the reason is kind of weird BlueCruise vehicles were updated with the most sophisticated driver attention system ive ever seen. It will complain in less time than it takes me to change a radio station. Before that update, I was enjoying the automated driving a little bit too much, and using it to take liberties with my attention in the car. That was awesome as a user experience. After the update, I am paying more attention to the road than I did when I was driving a manual. There is no benefit to being able to take my hands off the steering wheel. That’s a good thing for safety, but it means that “level 2.5” driving (or whatever) adds zero marginal utility.
- rgovostes 2y ago
  Ford brags that BlueCruise gets top marks from Consumer Reports but I think it's mostly because of because of this driver monitoring, rather than actual driving performance. > Starting with 2024 model-year vehicles, we will deduct points if an [active driving assistance] system doesn’t have adequate [direct driver monitoring systems]. Right now, only Ford and GM’s systems meet our criteria for earning additional points, but others could be available soon. ... > Ford’s BlueCruise sets a high standard among [active driving assistance] systems, aided by an infrared camera that monitors the driver’s eyes to determine whether they are looking at the road. If the driver glances away from the road for more than about 5 second... the system will give the driver a visual warning and an audible chime.
blahgeek 2y ago
> Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, seemingly much further behind, Tesla Cybertaxi, Amazon/Zoox, and Uber/Yandex? Global-wise, there are also a few Chinese companies in the robotaxi market. Pony.ai and WeRide both recently went in public market.
- Mashimo 2y ago
  And I think some in Germany as well. Not yet with customers, but in the testing phase.
Tiktaalik 2y ago
> Strange that they would bow out. It does seem strange but when one considers that the CEO of one of these competitors spent ~$260M to help elect the next President and he will have his ear on matters of autonomous car regulation, maybe not so strange. If future autonomous car regulations are influenced by Musk and end up being lax and favour the technological approach that Tesla has taken, then GM/Cruise may have made significant irrelevant investments to solve issues that are no longer relevant, and this puts them on poor footing in the new competitive landscape. It's possible they're bowing out early on the assumption that this will no longer be a competition that they can win.
- hiddencost 2y ago
  100%. To be clear, the "no longer relevant issue" is safety regulations designed to protect citizens from getting killed.
pj_mukh 2y ago
For reference: "Ford BlueCruise is a hands-free driving assistance feature that allows drivers to take their hands off the wheel on certain preapproved roads" "It seems like drivers did not find the feature compelling and were not renewing. Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board." No, because BlueCruise sounds like an asinine feature. To make me pay $2450 more for a car for some arbitrary selection roads for that feature to be available doesn't make sense to me. Cruise really was on to something, well w/e GM's loss!
- nradov 2y ago
  BlueCruise is a legitimate incremental improvement over more limited driver assistance systems. It clearly has some value to some drivers. But an extra $2450 is tough to swallow on a mainstream brand when middle-class consumers are already struggling to afford a new car. In a few years Ford will probably just bundle it in with common option packages.
makestuff 2y ago
Super cruise started out as high definition maps of US highways that GM made themselves. At the time (around 2018/19) they were using mobile eye’s technology/SOCs and integrating it into their vehicles. Cruise was operating as a completely separate unit and nothing was shared. GM later had a PR release for UltraCruise which was supposedly developed in house and maybe that uses Cruise technology. However, AFAIK it was never released and is rumored to be shelved.
Terr_ 2y ago
> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board. My pet theory is that it really took off because a bunch of investors were hoping to capture and capitalize on the baby boomers aging out of being able to easily drive themselves. They tried to speed up technological advancements in order to meet that window of a large more-affluent cohort of potential customers. So it might be interesting to somehow plot total "self driving" investment against that kind of customer base projection over time.
- danans 2y ago
  > were hoping to capture and capitalize on the baby boomers aging out of being able to easily drive themselves. They tried to speed up technological advancements in order to meet that window of a large more-affluent cohort of potential customers. That's still a huge market. And the baby boomers are the most affluent demographic in the western world.
- jollyllama 2y ago
  Interesting theory but I think the investment issues are simpler, and non-revenue producing business models simply don't make sense outside of the window of the low interest rate years.
jshprentz 2y ago
Brad Templeton's Robotaxi Timeline[1] (October 2024) shows a dozen milestones that Waymo has achieved over nearly 15 years from "Make a nice video" to "100,000 Rides per week." Waymo needs two more milestones to achieve "Production!" Waymo's competitors are behind on the timeline, but may move faster thanks to improved technology and a more welcoming social environment. [1] https://www.templetons.com/brad/robocars/timeline.html https://www.templetons.com/brad/robocars/timeline.html
steveoscaro 2y ago
It's weird to me to see so many people thinking Tesla is "far behind", when in reality, they're far, far ahead of the competition for a general purpose and scalable self driving solution. Seems like political biases just cloud judgement so much. Youtube now has videos comparing Tesla FSD V13 with Waymo rides on the same routes.
- herval 2y ago
  I tried both extensively (have the full FSD package on my Model 3). FSD still feels suicidal in a good day, plain incapable on average. I can’t imagine how someone would compare it to a multi-sensor setup - a single camera can’t match the level of prescience a Waymo or Cruise have. But also as the overall experience is just absurdly different. Waymo was the first tech thing I felt was truly magical in _decades_. Meanwhile the best I can get out of Tesla FSD is straight highways. And even there, there’s random glitches (the forever annoying ghost braking being the one that makes me feel particularly unsafe with it)
  - delabay 2y ago
    Interesting, I use FSD for two hours a day and I can relate to none of what you have said.
    - karlgkk 2y ago
      Certain routes and models are infamous for this. I recently got a 12.5 demo from a friend that was both impressive when it worked, and truly horrendous when it didn’t. And yes, we had a phantom break event - which appeared to be due to windy road conditions. That’s inexcusable tbqh The problem is that at the end of the day, enough people still have serious issues and Tesla wildly oversells the capability of their system. I think they’ll “get there” in terms of functionality and reliability but it’s nowhere near what waymo is reporting
- bcoates 2y ago
  There are (crappy, dangerous-seeming) genuine full autonomous-assuming-you-don't-count-remote-safety-drivers Waymos on the street where I live, in volume, for a while now. Tesla's equivalent system appears to be 100% vaporware. I don't understand the case for them not being far behind.
jmount 2y ago
Reminds me of my father in law's experience with Toyota (I think). The car's nav system had an update available on a CD you put into the car stereo. The dealership made him order one, instead of the much more reasonable loaning him one.
- karlgkk 2y ago
  Those updates were frequently map updates, which at the time were licensed for money.
SkyPuncher 2y ago
> It seems like drivers did not find the feature compelling and were not renewing. IMO, it's largely because BlueCruise (and all of the similar services) is not sufficiently better than the non-subscription driver assists. I have the option of BlueCruise on my vehicle and it's just not a compelling offer. * It only works on major highways. Beyond actual coverage, major highways are places where the standard driver assists already work extremely well. * It does nothing about traffic around you. You have to be prepared to react. Not much different than driver assist. * It's wickedly expensive. Right now, radar assisted cruise and camera based lane centering eases 95% of my driving fatigue.
- logifail 2y ago
  > it's just not a compelling offer I drive (and have driven) a fair number of rental cars due to travel, and I have to say I feel that way about many new vehicles in their entirety. So much vehicle tech is at best unimpressive and at worst positively in my way as a driver. > It's wickedly expensive We own two cars, 6 and 10 years old respectively, yet I've never felt less motivated to look at new cars than I do now. Guess our part towards saving the planet may well turn out to be 'driving that existing ICE vehicle for just a little bit longer'...
  - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
    If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor. So if you drive an average amount with those cars you're not saving the planet by continuing to drive them. In a well functioning system you'd be selling them on to people who drive very little and are old and set in their ways and replacing them with an EV.
    - logifail 2y ago
      > If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor (Genuine question, not whataboutism...) what about the environmental aspects of manufacturing and distributing a vehicle other than CO2 emissions? > old and set in their ways I fear I may be approaching this stage myself! :)
asynchronous 2y ago
I cease to understand how the average HN commentator doesn’t see Tesla as the leader in this space, and my only guess is all the FUD media around them. If you have a Tesla, you know that it’s far and above the best driver-assist software in the entire market, and next place isn’t even close. Sure FSD isn’t Waymo, but it’s entirely different tech and it can drive infinitely more places than the two cities Waymo supports.
- martindbp 2y ago
  V13.2 is probably close to 1000 miles per critical intervention now. Geofence it, avoid stupidly dangerous UPLs and fix some map issues and they're already on par with Waymo. Next version has 3x the number of parameters and 3x context length. If you know anything about scaling laws you wouldn't be betting on Waymo right now.
jcgrillo 2y ago
This seems like an industry wide admission that this stuff doesn't actually work, tbh. I've heard similar things from Farley at Ford--advanced lane keeping cruise control systems work, robotaxis don't. Only the "tech" companies are so committed as to double down and try to wish this sci-fi into reality. The car companies are a little more grounded in reality.
- nradov 2y ago
  But Waymo actually works? It's limited by geography and speed but they have robotaxis carrying paying customers in multiple cities. This is reality today, not sci-fi.
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    When will it be profitable? The carmakers are betting that L3 autonomy is a profitable investment, but robotaxis aren't. Regardless of what Waymo can or can't demonstrate technically. So either the carmakers are wrong or Waymo is. I guess we'll wait and see.
    - nradov 2y ago
      Well now you're asking a different question. Robotaxis clearly work today and are rapidly improving. Waymo is past the technical demonstration stage and has paying customers. Alphabet doesn't report profitability for that unit but it will probably take a number of years until they can drive down costs and achieve economies of scale. The senior leadership seems to be willing to fund this initiative indefinitely. Several other carmakers beyond GM are still pursuing L4+ autonomous technology. So apparently they don't think Waymo is wrong, although they're way behind.
      - jcgrillo 2y ago
        It's not a different question. Passion projects that aren't profitable don't last. It doesn't matter what a technology can do if there's no reason to use it.
delabay 2y ago
> GM Super Cruise comparable to Tesla FSD I just spit up my drink. Thank you for that.
mkhalil 2y ago
"I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives." Seems like a) the salesperson might not know his vehicles and perhaps it just wasn't a Super Cruise enabled vehicle (meaning, it wasn't added-on to that specific vehicle). b) the actual Super-Cruise module was broken in that vehicle, and that was his excuse c) he didn't know how or wasn't comfortable with telling you how to enable it. (some people are still quite afraid of giving full control over to computers) I have tested numerous vehicles with Super Cruise; I quite enjoyed it. I could be wrong, but unless it's a new GM rule, afaik, and with my understanding of how dealerships work (as far as the ones I've visited), dealerships try to avoid messing with the vehicle programming as much as they can. It's rather sad, as aside from the manufactures, dealerships have the most tools and access to the vehicles programming, but rarely-if-ever stray from the service manual. Custom programming kind of is a market for that reason. Living in a state with a very large automotive industry, there are a lot of people who have the tools + knowledge that offer custom programming services like: Programming the key fob that if one was to hold the unlock-door button for 5 seconds, the driver side window opens. And if the lock button is pressed once, then held for 5 seconds, all the windows are rolled up. Enabling a bunch of different video codecs/formats and enabling video-playback while the car is in motion if the passenger seat detects something siting there, etc, etc...
- rgovostes 2y ago
  The vehicle was equipped for Super Cruise. The feature is tied to a subscription account, and GM/the dealership do not provide subscriptions for showroom cars. After I wrote my comment, the dealership contacted me to say they had set up a demo subscription with GM for the vehicle if I wanted another test drive.
mulmen 2y ago
GM hasn’t been a car company since the 1980s. It’s a finance operation. Leadership only cares about developing products that are good enough to sell financing. They really don’t know how to develop a compelling product, even though they have an enormous amount of experience and engineering talent. It’s very similar to the failure of Boeing but GM doesn’t make anything that can kill 200 people at once so we don’t notice.
chrischen 2y ago
Being just behind #1 (Waymo) and deciding the market isn't big enough is not a good sign for the robo-taxi market.
- ggjkvcxddd 2y ago
  Are we forgetting that this only happened because they got in huge trouble with regulators and had to withdraw their cars from the street for like a year? I wouldn't take their statement at complete face value and don't see any reason for pessimism for Waymo.
  - antupis 2y ago
    Yup, there is zero chance that the market is too small. The only issues are whether a company can the technology to work and obtain regulatory approval.
    - friendzis 2y ago
      Size of the market is for all practical purposes function of price. The competition to robotaxis is first and foremost humans. The major question is if robotaxi companies can provide the service at the cost of ubers *profitably*.
      - antupis 2y ago
        This has a strong vibe of the past: "In the early 1980s AT&T asked McKinsey to estimate how many cellular phones would be in use in the world at the turn of the century. The consultancy noted all the problems with the new devices—the handsets were absurdly heavy, the batteries kept running out, the coverage was patchy and the cost per minute was exorbitant—and concluded that the total market would be about 900,000. At the time this persuaded AT&T to pull out of the market, although it changed its mind later. "
        yifanl 2y ago
        And in the more recent past, we asked Juicero if squeezing a small volume of bags by hand could be done more cheaply by machines, and they told us "absolutely!"
m463 2y ago
> the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives I wonder if this is a liability thing (driver would be responsible). Or it could suck and the chances of buying the car go down. I remember walking into an apple store and seeing the apple vision pro headset. I asked to try it, and they said "you can't. You have to make an appointment and blah blah". If someone adds friction to the buying process, there must be some reason - they must be hiding something (poor performance, complexity, price, etc)
griomnib 2y ago
The competition is human drivers.
netcan 2y ago
>Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy Before the iPhone came out, some pretty decent/popular smartphones existed. I had clients in the industry. They sold a lot of n95s and such. But... data plans sucked. Apple did an exclusive deal and forced them to include 2gb of data. They could not sell phones with data-less plans. Customers could not buy iphones on data-less plans. At some point you have to nudge the paradigm.
- dkrich 2y ago
  The iPhone had enormous demonstrated demand
b112 2y ago
I just bought a new Mustang, and from what I can tell it's total junk. Many others on forums report the same, and here's an example of a component being borked. AEB, Automatic Emergency Braking, is on by default and always turns back on at vehicle start. It's dangerous. An example? Even with a camera and a separate radar, it is borked. I've been behind another car, slowing for a light, and hit a downward slope of a large speedbump and SLAM the brakes come on. Why? The radar suddenly sees pavement, as the nose of the car is pointed down, but the camera sees car + brake light ahead. This is at 30km/hr, and everyone is braking fine, the car ahead is not even close. And proof it's not me is the 5 times it happened in 2 weeks, it was always something like this. I was almost hit 3 times. It literally panic brakes. Horribly designed. I finally had it and removed the radar sensor with forscan. With behaviour like this in something as simple as AEB, by no means would I trust anytiong else. Forums show people complaining about: * adaptive cruise slowing down, or speeding up because it sees speed limit signs on offramps, or even adjacent roads * the lane assist pulling strongly because the car thinks an offramp is the main road. * reports of swerving into other lanes when passing some vehicles, the car confused It's just junk. This beta testing on our roads needs to stop. What cracks me up is this. If you asked a skilled software dev, if they'd prefer to have software designed by a team, any team, responsible for tgeir life? They'd likely say no. Because we've all seen the crappy code that gets produced. We know of bugs. We know of failures in testing, automated or not. These cars ae all extremely buggy, just as any software project is. But beyond that, auto manufacturers are notorious for cutting corners. I just can't imagine why anyone, this decade, would want to trust auto drive anything.
ethagknight 2y ago
I’ve had a Yukon with supercruise for 18 months. It is fantastic for highway driving, particularly, we’ve driven it west from Tennessee to Colorado and Florida. Other comments claiming it’s the same as other standard driver-assist packages are incorrect. Totally hands free, no “ping pong” with the lanes. That said, when trying to BUY a supercruise vehicle, the sales guys were clueless, I had to review the stat sheets of each car to see which ones did or did not have it. GM is treating this technology as “surveys say 2% of the market wants a self driving vehicle” (incorrect question) compared to “install on every vehicle as an available subscription, let the sales team earn their way.” I’m sure the tech is expensive, but it can’t be that much more at the OEM level. I also have a Tesla with FSD. FSD is truly amazing but still struggles with edge cases like, my office has two entrances, one is blocked by barrels, it tries to turn into the barrels every time.
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  From my understanding, super cruise only works on pre-approved roads/road sections, whereas FSD works just about anywhere. When I last checked my commute to work, the main highway I take becomes unsupported half way to work, despite it being the same bland typical highway layout. I really don't want to buy a Tesla, but from what I can tell, nobody has anything close to what FSD offers.
  - bayindirh 2y ago
    > nobody has anything close to what FSD offers. From what I read about it, you're absolutely right. Down to the point of unwanted veering towards road dividers and other vehicles.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - hedora 2y ago
      > Down to the point of unwanted veering towards road dividers and other vehicles. Our 2024 Kia does this every 10-20 miles on average. You don't even have to enable lane assist. It also randomly decides to weaken the regenerative braking, or switch out of single pedal mode. If you disable enough of the safety features it stops doing these things, but, for instance, that means you can't have blind spot detection that works when you're going over 5mph and a working steering column at the same time.
gwbas1c 2y ago
> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board. I've had one Tesla for 6 years, another for 2: I've gotten to a point where I find Autopilot boring and turn it off just for something to do. My older Tesla has enhanced Autopilot. As impressive as it is, it's very glitchy. I primarily use it so I don't speed. Because enhanced autopilot was so glitchy, when we added a 2nd Tesla to the household, we didn't pay for FSD. (Enhanced autopilot was too expensive given how glitchy it was in my older car.) The free trials of FSD in the 2nd Tesla are impressive... And glitchy. I constantly need to take over on surface roads; but it is very nice on freeways. The thing is, "self driving" as a feature just isn't worth the sticker price. If you're sitting in the driver's seat, and there's nothing to do, you can just save yourself a boatload of cash and drive the car yourself. Especially if you have to remain alert at all times, the best way to cut the boredom is to drive the car.
- LegitShady 2y ago
  self driving makes total sense if its the sci-fi like dream of being able to read the news or a novel in the drivers seat while your car safely takes you to your destination. But if I have to maintain a hand on the steering wheel and monitor the car I may as well be driving.
  - Kirby64 2y ago
    Any of the advanced lane keeping systems are immensely helpful for lowering fatigue, especially on longer drives. I think it's quite hard to recognize how fatiguing it is to constantly make sure your car is centered in the lane with small hand movements. In my experience, long car rides are substantially less fatiguing when I just have to 'oversee' the car, rather than fully drive it.
onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
> Cruise allegedly has one of the most sophisticated autonomous driving platforms, and GM's Super Cruise (if they share any tech) is comparable to Tesla FSD. The facts don't matter anymore. Just perception.
marvin 2y ago
Tesla will win this, followed by Cruise. Waymo isn't scalable.

ugh123 2y ago

> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board I think you mean interest in level 3 autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board

leesec 2y ago

Yes and Google has spent 20B to get to a small rollout

com2kid 2y ago

> Small anecdote: I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy. Sadly this is believable, I've asked to check out things like remote start and control of heating/cooling, and the sales people cannot show those features off because they require an app + subscription tied to the car.

mingus88 2y ago
Based on my anecdotal experience, another issue is that salespeople are not trained on the tech I worked on a feature for new vehicles and the company failed in part because buyers simply didn’t know those features were part of the vehicle. Dealers never set it up for the buyer and it wasn’t something many people would think to do on their own A salesperson isn’t going to jeopardize an easy sale by bungling some fancy new feature they can’t control
- rgovostes 2y ago
  I don't want to be a jerk but the salesperson couldn't pronounce "autonomous" which tells me they aren't being trained in selling the feature at all. I can't even remember him referring to it by the marketing name.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - ashoeafoot 2y ago
    HN priorities are not real world priorities
    - lukan 2y ago
      People in the real world are not interested in autonomous driving? I doubt that. They just care less for the technical details.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  I’d guess this is at least half the features on my iPhone. I’m sure it can do things that I’m not even thinking a phone can do, but nobody set anything up, and it’s not very obvious or discoverable.

schiffern 2y ago

>Google/Waymo ... Amazon/Zoox ... Uber/Yandex ... GM Super Cruise ... Ford BluesClues Conspicuously absent is The Car+AI Company That Shall Not Be Named. That's the one the press release is referring to, I guarantee it.

rgovostes 2y ago
Just edited to add it in. Wikipedia says they're not going into production until 2027 though, and unlike the others I don't think they're operating in any markets.
- schiffern 2y ago
  GM SuperCruise and Ford BluesClues are comparable products, so I don't know why you'd exclude Tesla's product as not "operating in any markets." Other companies have neat AV demos (some that they even make people pay for), but fundamentally they can't and won't scale.
  - rgovostes 2y ago
    I am not sure I have all the facts straight but: Super Cruise and BlueCruise are features available on GM and Ford passenger cars, respectively. They aren't taxi services. I tried to make the distinction between companies participating in the "increasingly competitive robotaxi market" versus just the ones that have some level of autonomous driving capability; tweaked comment. GM was majority stakeholder in Cruise, which was gearing up to a ride hailing service. Cruise's cars have instruments like LiDAR on the roof, unlike Super Cruise-equipped cars. Ford wrote about an "initial launch of a commercial self-driving service in 2021" but I don't think it materialized. A photo of their robotaxi bears the logo of Argo AI, a startup that shut down in 2022.
    - schiffern 2y ago
      The difference is that GM and Ford have no viable strategy for transitioning these features into taxi services, whereas Tesla does. Not sure how it's suddenly so controversial to realize that Detroit is terrible at software strategy. This has been the conventional wisdom (and with good reason) for quite some time.

xnx 2y ago

> Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, seemingly much further behind Yes. I think GM leadership has finally learned enough to realize how far behind they are.

mensetmanusman 2y ago
Maybe in some small parts of the country. Tesla is dominating most everywhere else in the US. I definitely have no access to a Waymo but have been driven by FSD in heavy construction. (Do not own a Tesla myself).
- xnx 2y ago
  It's possible that Tesla will have a massive jump in capability of their system, but currently it doesn't do any self-driving anywhere (e.g. you can't sit in the back seat).
  - red75prime 2y ago
    ASS. Actually Smart Summon. You can sit in the back seat (but there's no point to, as the maximal distance to the destination and speed are appropriate only for parking lots).
- renewiltord 2y ago
  I’ve fallen asleep alone in a Waymo on the way home. I don’t think you can do that yet in a Tesla.
- root_axis 2y ago
  Tesla is not "dominating" Waymo, they provide completely different offerings. Waymo provides a taxi service (like Uber) with autonomous vehicles. Tesla sells cars that offer a driving assistant feature, but the system is not able to operate safely without human supervision. I can safely and legally take a Waymo home after getting drunk at the bar, this is not true of a Tesla.
- bdangubic 2y ago
  get drunk, pass out in a Tesla and have it take you home. come back here when this happens (ballparking 2089…).

chrchr 2y ago

It makes you wonder how much more effective U.S. auto makers might be without the regulation that requires them to sell through dealerships.

throwaway48476 2y ago
Dealerships have massively consolidated too, they have larger profits than automakers. It's absurd.
axus 2y ago
Isn't Tesla service worse than the dealerships? Maybe things have changed, my opinion is completely based on what I've read on the Internet.
- correlator 2y ago
  I love the tesla service. Bought my car without talking to a single sales person, they come to my home to rotate my tires on my schedule. Only complaint is cosmetic service tends to have a long appointment wait time, but things like a cracked windshield were immediately serviced. I don't know how I will switch to another car brand after this.
- Rebelgecko 2y ago
  Their buying/test drive experience is top tier IMO but I know multiple people who waited literally 4+ months to get undrivable cars repaired. Those experiences were mostly pre-2023 so maybe it's better now
  - ggreer 2y ago
    It was bad a couple years ago but has gotten a lot better. The reason for this was that Tesla scaled up manufacturing quickly, but took longer to scale up service centers and certify third party shops. For a while there was only one certified Tesla repair shop within 100 miles of me. Now there are at least ten, four of which are Tesla service centers.
- 2y ago

throwaway48476 2y ago

There is still interest in autonomous driving, just not assisted driving where the marketing did not match the reality.

jerlam 2y ago

I am not sure you want to include international markets (if not the technology) but it seems like Baidu in China is nearly at par with Waymo: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/18/cars/china-baidu-apollo-go-robotaxi-anxiety-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/18/cars/china-baidu-apollo-go-ro...

crazygringo 2y ago
> Earlier this month, one robotaxi ran a red light and crashed into a pedestrian, state-run paper People’s Daily reported. That doesn't sound like it's nearly at par. I'd love to see some direct safety comparison stats.

jedberg 2y ago

And when you go to Tesla for a test drive, they first thing they do is shove it into auto-cruise or whatever they call it whether you want to or not! At least that is what happened to me when I test drove one 10 years ago. Maybe they don't do that anymore.

correlator 2y ago
Wow that must have been a wild experience 10 years ago! Today, I think they should do this. It is rare I need to touch the wheel or pedal these days and people should experience it.
- jedberg 2y ago
  Yeah 10 years ago it was a bit much. It was pretty much just lane keeping and distance keeping, but it didn't read signs or lights yet. So if you're coming up on a signal it would just keep going!
  - schiffern 2y ago
    Quick, nobody tell them about cruise control. ;-) > Chrysler was the first manufacturer to implement the device in 1958. They called it “Auto-Pilot” and it appeared in their luxury model as an upgraded option. Soon after, General Motors installed it in their Cadillac vehicles, naming it “Cruise Control” which has stuck to this day. https://www.folsomautomall.com/blog/2022/november/21/the-history-of-cruise-control.htm https://www.folsomautomall.com/blog/2022/november/21/the-his...
    - fastball 2y ago
      Not sure I understand your point.
      - schiffern 2y ago
        >>> it didn't read signs or lights yet. So if you're coming up on a signal it would just keep going!

boshalfoshal 2y ago

Supercruise might be comparable to Tesla's "Autosteer" product but its incomparable to Tesla's paid "FSD Supervised" product. The latter is closer to a Waymo or Cruise than it is to a Mercedes or GM driver assist.

jaimex2 2y ago
It's not even close between Tesla and Waymo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv9HtWUf27s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hv9HtWUf27s Arguably this is Waymo in its "home turf"
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mbreese 2y ago
  Arguably, it would be a better comparison if the Tesla was restricted from highway driving. I understand the letting the car figure out its own route, but I’m more interested in seeing the Tesla navigate city streets.
- adrr 2y ago
  Tesla can't self drive in any condition on any street. Hard to compare that to a level 4 company where the car can go hundreds of thousands of miles without disengagement. Being a owner FSD, its no where near being able to drive itself without supervision, it tries to run reds, misses people in cross walks and can't understand signs like "Do Not Enter".
  - minhazm 2y ago
    > Hard to compare that to a level 4 company where the car can go hundreds of thousands of miles without disengagement This is nowhere close to being true. The latest numbers I could find for 2022 are 17,060 miles per disengagement[1] for Waymo. And even then the definition is not quite clear, because these are safety disengagements from what I can tell, and not disengagements for things like getting stuck because the road is closed or something else. [1] https://www.eetimes.com/waymo-cruise-dominate-av-testing/ https://www.eetimes.com/waymo-cruise-dominate-av-testing/

margalabargala 2y ago

> Small anecdote: I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy. That was a your-dealership issue, not a GM issue. GM doesn't run the dealerships (though they sure have plenty of influence). I test drove the Silverado EV a month ago and got to try out super cruise.

schiffern 2y ago
That's a "GM's business model" problem, which is again a GM problem. The top-selling EV maker in the US doesn't have any dealerships, so clearly it's not an insurmountable problem. GM just hasn't prioritized surmounting it.
- dangus 2y ago
  To be fair to GM, Tesla basically had to be a brand new auto company and work through a whole bunch of legal loopholes and battles just to have their direct sales model. GM and the rest of the legacy automakers are essentially bound to the dealership system and the dealerships represent a much larger lobbying base than the automakers themselves. We are seeing this play out with VW’s attempt to direct-sell Scout vehicle's and immediately getting challenged/sued by dealerships over it. [1] https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2024-10-25/auto-dealer-groups-to-challenge-scout-motors-decision-to-sell-directly-to-us-consumers https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2024-10-25/...
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    GM and the other automakers should be lobbying to change the dealership laws then.
    - AlotOfReading 2y ago
      They do.

AlotOfReading 2y ago

Cruise and GM Supercruise/ultracruise share nothing except the names and a VP somewhere inside GM. Entirely separate organizations and tech, at least the last time I had any knowledge of the matter.

porphyra 2y ago
Yeah and neither of them is close to FSD in capabilities lol. Super Cruise/Ultra Cruise is a brittle highway-only thing, only available in a handful of $200k+ GM cars, that works by localizing to a detailed lidar map of some interstate routes.
- mouth 2y ago
  This was also available on the Chevy Bolt EUV as an add-on for $2,200. The Bolt EUV started at $28,795, so with the add-on it could be had for ~$31k before tax, title, etc. Not sure where you got the $200k+ number.
  - AlotOfReading 2y ago
    The parent post is talking about the Cruise vehicles made by the company this article is covering, a completely separate thing from the supercruise feature that consumers could actually buy. At one point many years ago, the Cruise vehicles cost >200k to manufacture.
  - porphyra 2y ago
    Ultra Cruise was only available on the expensive Celestiq before it got cancelled and merged with Super Cruise. Apparently, the Celestiq starts at $340,000, even higher than my original estimate of $200k.

droopyEyelids 2y ago

I’m one of the people that did not renew BlueCruise and the reason is kind of weird BlueCruise vehicles were updated with the most sophisticated driver attention system ive ever seen. It will complain in less time than it takes me to change a radio station. Before that update, I was enjoying the automated driving a little bit too much, and using it to take liberties with my attention in the car. That was awesome as a user experience. After the update, I am paying more attention to the road than I did when I was driving a manual. There is no benefit to being able to take my hands off the steering wheel. That’s a good thing for safety, but it means that “level 2.5” driving (or whatever) adds zero marginal utility.

rgovostes 2y ago
Ford brags that BlueCruise gets top marks from Consumer Reports but I think it's mostly because of because of this driver monitoring, rather than actual driving performance. > Starting with 2024 model-year vehicles, we will deduct points if an [active driving assistance] system doesn’t have adequate [direct driver monitoring systems]. Right now, only Ford and GM’s systems meet our criteria for earning additional points, but others could be available soon. ... > Ford’s BlueCruise sets a high standard among [active driving assistance] systems, aided by an infrared camera that monitors the driver’s eyes to determine whether they are looking at the road. If the driver glances away from the road for more than about 5 second... the system will give the driver a visual warning and an audible chime.

blahgeek 2y ago

> Isn't there basically Google/Waymo and then, seemingly much further behind, Tesla Cybertaxi, Amazon/Zoox, and Uber/Yandex? Global-wise, there are also a few Chinese companies in the robotaxi market. Pony.ai and WeRide both recently went in public market.

Mashimo 2y ago
And I think some in Germany as well. Not yet with customers, but in the testing phase.

Tiktaalik 2y ago

> Strange that they would bow out. It does seem strange but when one considers that the CEO of one of these competitors spent ~$260M to help elect the next President and he will have his ear on matters of autonomous car regulation, maybe not so strange. If future autonomous car regulations are influenced by Musk and end up being lax and favour the technological approach that Tesla has taken, then GM/Cruise may have made significant irrelevant investments to solve issues that are no longer relevant, and this puts them on poor footing in the new competitive landscape. It's possible they're bowing out early on the assumption that this will no longer be a competition that they can win.

hiddencost 2y ago
100%. To be clear, the "no longer relevant issue" is safety regulations designed to protect citizens from getting killed.

pj_mukh 2y ago

For reference: "Ford BlueCruise is a hands-free driving assistance feature that allows drivers to take their hands off the wheel on certain preapproved roads" "It seems like drivers did not find the feature compelling and were not renewing. Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board." No, because BlueCruise sounds like an asinine feature. To make me pay $2450 more for a car for some arbitrary selection roads for that feature to be available doesn't make sense to me. Cruise really was on to something, well w/e GM's loss!

nradov 2y ago
BlueCruise is a legitimate incremental improvement over more limited driver assistance systems. It clearly has some value to some drivers. But an extra $2450 is tough to swallow on a mainstream brand when middle-class consumers are already struggling to afford a new car. In a few years Ford will probably just bundle it in with common option packages.

makestuff 2y ago

Super cruise started out as high definition maps of US highways that GM made themselves. At the time (around 2018/19) they were using mobile eye’s technology/SOCs and integrating it into their vehicles. Cruise was operating as a completely separate unit and nothing was shared. GM later had a PR release for UltraCruise which was supposedly developed in house and maybe that uses Cruise technology. However, AFAIK it was never released and is rumored to be shelved.

Terr_ 2y ago

> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board. My pet theory is that it really took off because a bunch of investors were hoping to capture and capitalize on the baby boomers aging out of being able to easily drive themselves. They tried to speed up technological advancements in order to meet that window of a large more-affluent cohort of potential customers. So it might be interesting to somehow plot total "self driving" investment against that kind of customer base projection over time.

danans 2y ago
> were hoping to capture and capitalize on the baby boomers aging out of being able to easily drive themselves. They tried to speed up technological advancements in order to meet that window of a large more-affluent cohort of potential customers. That's still a huge market. And the baby boomers are the most affluent demographic in the western world.
jollyllama 2y ago
Interesting theory but I think the investment issues are simpler, and non-revenue producing business models simply don't make sense outside of the window of the low interest rate years.

jshprentz 2y ago

Brad Templeton's Robotaxi Timeline[1] (October 2024) shows a dozen milestones that Waymo has achieved over nearly 15 years from "Make a nice video" to "100,000 Rides per week." Waymo needs two more milestones to achieve "Production!" Waymo's competitors are behind on the timeline, but may move faster thanks to improved technology and a more welcoming social environment. [1] https://www.templetons.com/brad/robocars/timeline.html https://www.templetons.com/brad/robocars/timeline.html

steveoscaro 2y ago

It's weird to me to see so many people thinking Tesla is "far behind", when in reality, they're far, far ahead of the competition for a general purpose and scalable self driving solution. Seems like political biases just cloud judgement so much. Youtube now has videos comparing Tesla FSD V13 with Waymo rides on the same routes.

herval 2y ago
I tried both extensively (have the full FSD package on my Model 3). FSD still feels suicidal in a good day, plain incapable on average. I can’t imagine how someone would compare it to a multi-sensor setup - a single camera can’t match the level of prescience a Waymo or Cruise have. But also as the overall experience is just absurdly different. Waymo was the first tech thing I felt was truly magical in _decades_. Meanwhile the best I can get out of Tesla FSD is straight highways. And even there, there’s random glitches (the forever annoying ghost braking being the one that makes me feel particularly unsafe with it)
- delabay 2y ago
  Interesting, I use FSD for two hours a day and I can relate to none of what you have said.
  - karlgkk 2y ago
    Certain routes and models are infamous for this. I recently got a 12.5 demo from a friend that was both impressive when it worked, and truly horrendous when it didn’t. And yes, we had a phantom break event - which appeared to be due to windy road conditions. That’s inexcusable tbqh The problem is that at the end of the day, enough people still have serious issues and Tesla wildly oversells the capability of their system. I think they’ll “get there” in terms of functionality and reliability but it’s nowhere near what waymo is reporting
bcoates 2y ago
There are (crappy, dangerous-seeming) genuine full autonomous-assuming-you-don't-count-remote-safety-drivers Waymos on the street where I live, in volume, for a while now. Tesla's equivalent system appears to be 100% vaporware. I don't understand the case for them not being far behind.

jmount 2y ago

Reminds me of my father in law's experience with Toyota (I think). The car's nav system had an update available on a CD you put into the car stereo. The dealership made him order one, instead of the much more reasonable loaning him one.

karlgkk 2y ago
Those updates were frequently map updates, which at the time were licensed for money.

SkyPuncher 2y ago

> It seems like drivers did not find the feature compelling and were not renewing. IMO, it's largely because BlueCruise (and all of the similar services) is not sufficiently better than the non-subscription driver assists. I have the option of BlueCruise on my vehicle and it's just not a compelling offer. * It only works on major highways. Beyond actual coverage, major highways are places where the standard driver assists already work extremely well. * It does nothing about traffic around you. You have to be prepared to react. Not much different than driver assist. * It's wickedly expensive. Right now, radar assisted cruise and camera based lane centering eases 95% of my driving fatigue.

logifail 2y ago
> it's just not a compelling offer I drive (and have driven) a fair number of rental cars due to travel, and I have to say I feel that way about many new vehicles in their entirety. So much vehicle tech is at best unimpressive and at worst positively in my way as a driver. > It's wickedly expensive We own two cars, 6 and 10 years old respectively, yet I've never felt less motivated to look at new cars than I do now. Guess our part towards saving the planet may well turn out to be 'driving that existing ICE vehicle for just a little bit longer'...
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor. So if you drive an average amount with those cars you're not saving the planet by continuing to drive them. In a well functioning system you'd be selling them on to people who drive very little and are old and set in their ways and replacing them with an EV.
  - logifail 2y ago
    > If you look at the lifecycle analysis of ICE cars, burning the fuel is the major contributor (Genuine question, not whataboutism...) what about the environmental aspects of manufacturing and distributing a vehicle other than CO2 emissions? > old and set in their ways I fear I may be approaching this stage myself! :)

asynchronous 2y ago

I cease to understand how the average HN commentator doesn’t see Tesla as the leader in this space, and my only guess is all the FUD media around them. If you have a Tesla, you know that it’s far and above the best driver-assist software in the entire market, and next place isn’t even close. Sure FSD isn’t Waymo, but it’s entirely different tech and it can drive infinitely more places than the two cities Waymo supports.

martindbp 2y ago
V13.2 is probably close to 1000 miles per critical intervention now. Geofence it, avoid stupidly dangerous UPLs and fix some map issues and they're already on par with Waymo. Next version has 3x the number of parameters and 3x context length. If you know anything about scaling laws you wouldn't be betting on Waymo right now.

jcgrillo 2y ago

This seems like an industry wide admission that this stuff doesn't actually work, tbh. I've heard similar things from Farley at Ford--advanced lane keeping cruise control systems work, robotaxis don't. Only the "tech" companies are so committed as to double down and try to wish this sci-fi into reality. The car companies are a little more grounded in reality.

nradov 2y ago
But Waymo actually works? It's limited by geography and speed but they have robotaxis carrying paying customers in multiple cities. This is reality today, not sci-fi.
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  When will it be profitable? The carmakers are betting that L3 autonomy is a profitable investment, but robotaxis aren't. Regardless of what Waymo can or can't demonstrate technically. So either the carmakers are wrong or Waymo is. I guess we'll wait and see.
  - nradov 2y ago
    Well now you're asking a different question. Robotaxis clearly work today and are rapidly improving. Waymo is past the technical demonstration stage and has paying customers. Alphabet doesn't report profitability for that unit but it will probably take a number of years until they can drive down costs and achieve economies of scale. The senior leadership seems to be willing to fund this initiative indefinitely. Several other carmakers beyond GM are still pursuing L4+ autonomous technology. So apparently they don't think Waymo is wrong, although they're way behind.
    - jcgrillo 2y ago
      It's not a different question. Passion projects that aren't profitable don't last. It doesn't matter what a technology can do if there's no reason to use it.

delabay 2y ago

> GM Super Cruise comparable to Tesla FSD I just spit up my drink. Thank you for that.

mkhalil 2y ago

"I visited a GM dealership this week and the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives." Seems like a) the salesperson might not know his vehicles and perhaps it just wasn't a Super Cruise enabled vehicle (meaning, it wasn't added-on to that specific vehicle). b) the actual Super-Cruise module was broken in that vehicle, and that was his excuse c) he didn't know how or wasn't comfortable with telling you how to enable it. (some people are still quite afraid of giving full control over to computers) I have tested numerous vehicles with Super Cruise; I quite enjoyed it. I could be wrong, but unless it's a new GM rule, afaik, and with my understanding of how dealerships work (as far as the ones I've visited), dealerships try to avoid messing with the vehicle programming as much as they can. It's rather sad, as aside from the manufactures, dealerships have the most tools and access to the vehicles programming, but rarely-if-ever stray from the service manual. Custom programming kind of is a market for that reason. Living in a state with a very large automotive industry, there are a lot of people who have the tools + knowledge that offer custom programming services like: Programming the key fob that if one was to hold the unlock-door button for 5 seconds, the driver side window opens. And if the lock button is pressed once, then held for 5 seconds, all the windows are rolled up. Enabling a bunch of different video codecs/formats and enabling video-playback while the car is in motion if the passenger seat detects something siting there, etc, etc...

rgovostes 2y ago
The vehicle was equipped for Super Cruise. The feature is tied to a subscription account, and GM/the dealership do not provide subscriptions for showroom cars. After I wrote my comment, the dealership contacted me to say they had set up a demo subscription with GM for the vehicle if I wanted another test drive.

mulmen 2y ago

GM hasn’t been a car company since the 1980s. It’s a finance operation. Leadership only cares about developing products that are good enough to sell financing. They really don’t know how to develop a compelling product, even though they have an enormous amount of experience and engineering talent. It’s very similar to the failure of Boeing but GM doesn’t make anything that can kill 200 people at once so we don’t notice.

chrischen 2y ago

Being just behind #1 (Waymo) and deciding the market isn't big enough is not a good sign for the robo-taxi market.

ggjkvcxddd 2y ago
Are we forgetting that this only happened because they got in huge trouble with regulators and had to withdraw their cars from the street for like a year? I wouldn't take their statement at complete face value and don't see any reason for pessimism for Waymo.
- antupis 2y ago
  Yup, there is zero chance that the market is too small. The only issues are whether a company can the technology to work and obtain regulatory approval.
  - friendzis 2y ago
    Size of the market is for all practical purposes function of price. The competition to robotaxis is first and foremost humans. The major question is if robotaxi companies can provide the service at the cost of ubers *profitably*.
    - antupis 2y ago
      This has a strong vibe of the past: "In the early 1980s AT&T asked McKinsey to estimate how many cellular phones would be in use in the world at the turn of the century. The consultancy noted all the problems with the new devices—the handsets were absurdly heavy, the batteries kept running out, the coverage was patchy and the cost per minute was exorbitant—and concluded that the total market would be about 900,000. At the time this persuaded AT&T to pull out of the market, although it changed its mind later. "
      - yifanl 2y ago
        And in the more recent past, we asked Juicero if squeezing a small volume of bags by hand could be done more cheaply by machines, and they told us "absolutely!"

m463 2y ago

> the salesperson told me Super Cruise was not enabled for test drives I wonder if this is a liability thing (driver would be responsible). Or it could suck and the chances of buying the car go down. I remember walking into an apple store and seeing the apple vision pro headset. I asked to try it, and they said "you can't. You have to make an appointment and blah blah". If someone adds friction to the buying process, there must be some reason - they must be hiding something (poor performance, complexity, price, etc)

griomnib 2y ago

The competition is human drivers.

netcan 2y ago

>Cruise was not enabled for test drives. The excuse was pretty weak, like the dealership would have to pay for the service or something. GM might have the technology but they are completely bungling the strategy Before the iPhone came out, some pretty decent/popular smartphones existed. I had clients in the industry. They sold a lot of n95s and such. But... data plans sucked. Apple did an exclusive deal and forced them to include 2gb of data. They could not sell phones with data-less plans. Customers could not buy iphones on data-less plans. At some point you have to nudge the paradigm.

dkrich 2y ago
The iPhone had enormous demonstrated demand

b112 2y ago

I just bought a new Mustang, and from what I can tell it's total junk. Many others on forums report the same, and here's an example of a component being borked. AEB, Automatic Emergency Braking, is on by default and always turns back on at vehicle start. It's dangerous. An example? Even with a camera and a separate radar, it is borked. I've been behind another car, slowing for a light, and hit a downward slope of a large speedbump and SLAM the brakes come on. Why? The radar suddenly sees pavement, as the nose of the car is pointed down, but the camera sees car + brake light ahead. This is at 30km/hr, and everyone is braking fine, the car ahead is not even close. And proof it's not me is the 5 times it happened in 2 weeks, it was always something like this. I was almost hit 3 times. It literally panic brakes. Horribly designed. I finally had it and removed the radar sensor with forscan. With behaviour like this in something as simple as AEB, by no means would I trust anytiong else. Forums show people complaining about: * adaptive cruise slowing down, or speeding up because it sees speed limit signs on offramps, or even adjacent roads * the lane assist pulling strongly because the car thinks an offramp is the main road. * reports of swerving into other lanes when passing some vehicles, the car confused It's just junk. This beta testing on our roads needs to stop. What cracks me up is this. If you asked a skilled software dev, if they'd prefer to have software designed by a team, any team, responsible for tgeir life? They'd likely say no. Because we've all seen the crappy code that gets produced. We know of bugs. We know of failures in testing, automated or not. These cars ae all extremely buggy, just as any software project is. But beyond that, auto manufacturers are notorious for cutting corners. I just can't imagine why anyone, this decade, would want to trust auto drive anything.

ethagknight 2y ago

I’ve had a Yukon with supercruise for 18 months. It is fantastic for highway driving, particularly, we’ve driven it west from Tennessee to Colorado and Florida. Other comments claiming it’s the same as other standard driver-assist packages are incorrect. Totally hands free, no “ping pong” with the lanes. That said, when trying to BUY a supercruise vehicle, the sales guys were clueless, I had to review the stat sheets of each car to see which ones did or did not have it. GM is treating this technology as “surveys say 2% of the market wants a self driving vehicle” (incorrect question) compared to “install on every vehicle as an available subscription, let the sales team earn their way.” I’m sure the tech is expensive, but it can’t be that much more at the OEM level. I also have a Tesla with FSD. FSD is truly amazing but still struggles with edge cases like, my office has two entrances, one is blocked by barrels, it tries to turn into the barrels every time.

Workaccount2 2y ago
From my understanding, super cruise only works on pre-approved roads/road sections, whereas FSD works just about anywhere. When I last checked my commute to work, the main highway I take becomes unsupported half way to work, despite it being the same bland typical highway layout. I really don't want to buy a Tesla, but from what I can tell, nobody has anything close to what FSD offers.
- bayindirh 2y ago
  > nobody has anything close to what FSD offers. From what I read about it, you're absolutely right. Down to the point of unwanted veering towards road dividers and other vehicles.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - hedora 2y ago
    > Down to the point of unwanted veering towards road dividers and other vehicles. Our 2024 Kia does this every 10-20 miles on average. You don't even have to enable lane assist. It also randomly decides to weaken the regenerative braking, or switch out of single pedal mode. If you disable enough of the safety features it stops doing these things, but, for instance, that means you can't have blind spot detection that works when you're going over 5mph and a working steering column at the same time.

gwbas1c 2y ago

> Interest in autonomous driving appears to be cooling across the board. I've had one Tesla for 6 years, another for 2: I've gotten to a point where I find Autopilot boring and turn it off just for something to do. My older Tesla has enhanced Autopilot. As impressive as it is, it's very glitchy. I primarily use it so I don't speed. Because enhanced autopilot was so glitchy, when we added a 2nd Tesla to the household, we didn't pay for FSD. (Enhanced autopilot was too expensive given how glitchy it was in my older car.) The free trials of FSD in the 2nd Tesla are impressive... And glitchy. I constantly need to take over on surface roads; but it is very nice on freeways. The thing is, "self driving" as a feature just isn't worth the sticker price. If you're sitting in the driver's seat, and there's nothing to do, you can just save yourself a boatload of cash and drive the car yourself. Especially if you have to remain alert at all times, the best way to cut the boredom is to drive the car.

LegitShady 2y ago
self driving makes total sense if its the sci-fi like dream of being able to read the news or a novel in the drivers seat while your car safely takes you to your destination. But if I have to maintain a hand on the steering wheel and monitor the car I may as well be driving.
- Kirby64 2y ago
  Any of the advanced lane keeping systems are immensely helpful for lowering fatigue, especially on longer drives. I think it's quite hard to recognize how fatiguing it is to constantly make sure your car is centered in the lane with small hand movements. In my experience, long car rides are substantially less fatiguing when I just have to 'oversee' the car, rather than fully drive it.

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago

> Cruise allegedly has one of the most sophisticated autonomous driving platforms, and GM's Super Cruise (if they share any tech) is comparable to Tesla FSD. The facts don't matter anymore. Just perception.

marvin 2y ago

Tesla will win this, followed by Cruise. Waymo isn't scalable.